Cases 31 - 40 of 108
Stephen S Lucas v. Matthew Cate et al
as 5:2013cv00310
Respondent:
Matthew Cate and The California Board of Parole Hearings
Petitioner:
Stephen S Lucas
Taylor v. California Board of Parole Hearings
as 1:2012cv02065
Plaintiff:
Jerry Lynn Taylor
Defendant:
California Board of Parole Hearings
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Taylor v. California Board of Parole Hearings
as 1:2012cv01723
Petitioner:
Jerry Lynn Taylor
Respondent:
California Board of Parole Hearings
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Taylor v. California Board of Parole Hearings
as 5:2012cv04899
Plaintiff:
Jerry Lynn Taylor
Defendant:
California Board of Parole Hearings
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Taylor v. California Board of Parole Hearings
as 3:2012cv04838
Petitioner:
Jerry Lynn Taylor
Respondent:
California Board of Parole Hearings
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Palomar v. Athans et al
as 2:2012cv00757
Plaintiff:
George Ruiz Palomar, II
Defendant:
T Athans, California Board of Parole Hearings, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timothy Johnson v. California Board of Parole Hea
as 11-17759
Petitioner - Appellant:
TIMOTHY DEMETRIUS JOHNSON
Respondent - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS
Singer v. California Board of Parole Hearings et al
as 2:2011cv02932
Plaintiff:
Dana L Singer
Defendant:
California Board of Parole Hearings, D. K. Sisto and Jerry Brown
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lerma v. Cate et al
as 5:2011cv04265
Petitioner:
Michael Lerma
Respondent:
Matthew Cate, G. D. Lewis and California Board of Parole Hearings
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Josh Thomas v. California Board of Parole, et al
as 11-16703
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOSH THOMAS
Respondent - Appellee:
CALIFORNIA BOARD OF PAROLE HEARING COMMISSIONERS and KEN CLARK, Warden
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
